I don't think it was a good decision to say anything about the book until he had read it. But then again I don't know what's going on behind the courtains so maybe it was for the best to say at least something. He didn't say much, but as some of you, I've the same feeling that he admited cheating on his wife. Maybe not denying and at the same time not saying anything is not the best strategy in this case.

I read that as an admission. Maybe not all parts of it, but a keen listener can hear he admits he cheated on his wife.

I'm in public relations ... so, I agree ... he's pretty much admitting there is some truth to these stories. On the other hand, if I were dispensing public relations counsel to His Majesty ... I would have told him to say nothing at all!

People hear what they want to hear. He hadnt read the book and i think his reaction is to the events that happened before he was married since he was talking about events from long time ago.

Its a good think Nina Eldh leaves the court in less than 2 months, somehow it all boils down to her ineffectivness to counter the PR-hysteria this book created.

And now he thinks that leaving the country for China will help him avoid questions. It does, from his family, not the press since China is about to be invaded by the swedish press(oh, i pitty the chinese:))

__________________
-------------------------------------------------"My feelings are all over the place." Prince Daniel express his feelings after announcing the birth of his daughter Estelle Silvia Ewa Mary

I really do not like this kind of slanderous mud slinging that is so common these days. First you dig up dirt about someone, paint them as "bad people" and then try to pressure them to resign. I wonder is someone trying to make the King abdicate or something and why.

I doubt it will go that far! Have any of our Swedish members had a look at the book?

On one hand I don't understand why people cheat (whether you are in a committed relationship like marriage or not), if you don't want to be with someone...just end it. I realize that that statement is VERY NAIVE, simplistic in nature and some people for a variety of reasons can't divorce. I also, don't understand why people who are in certain positions and have a lot more to lose, decide to step out of their marriage and take that risk. But that type of thinking can lead us into a long out conversation about power, sex, the thrill of cheating and the high of taking risks. Whatever.

That being said, I am not sure I understand what the point of this book is...other than to embarass the King and Queen and possible wound the monarchy. If this is true, and by the King's statement/actions it might be, does the Queen need to relive this (if she didn't know before), do the children (although grown) need to be reminded of maybe a not so pleasant time of their childhood? Do we need to know this? And why?

Yes, the King is a public figure but is the purpose to show that he is human and not perfect? Or that he had a point in his marriage where all was not well but they survived it and their union is better now than before the hiccups, or that because of these hiccups the King is just like us, and therefore Sweden doesn't need the monarchy?

Why else to bring this out now when as you say - it seems- all is well between the King and Queen? If there was something , they got over it. Some people choose to end their marriage, others manage to work on their marriage.

I will never forget that scene with the rose at the crown princess' wedding this summer! If that is not love and a good marriage, what is? [I said good not perfect, nothing is perfect]

I'm sort of confused about the timing of the alleged affairs. Of course the King himself referred to it being in the past, but that's something I would expect him to say even if it happened two weeks ago. (Obviously it's much better than admitting, "Why yes, I've behaved terribly in the past, and I haven't changed at all!") But what exactly does the book accuse him of? Having a string of these episodes in, say, the mid-1980s, or does it accuse him of recent behavior in the past year or so?

I will never forget that scene with the rose at the crown princess' wedding this summer! If that is not love and a good marriage, what is? [I said good not perfect, nothing is perfect]

I also think that Carl Gustaf and Silvia have a happy marriage, and they seem to love each others really. That speech he held for his wife in the beginning of the speech to the bridal couple, it tells that they respect each others. And Silvia has been talking about Carl Gustaf very kindly in some tv documents, like "Familjen Bernadotte".

Victoria also loves her father. That she said in public in the speech on her father's 60th birthday. If Victoria had known about these things written in the book, I don't know if she would love her father that much. Victoria seems to value justice very high.

These are the only things that make me think that the stories in the book are not true after all.

"The book also tells of an alleged year-long love affair the King had with singer Camilla Henemark, a founding member of the band Army of Lovers who was born to a Nigerian father and Swedish mother. The relationship reportedly lasted about a year in the late 1990s with the knowledge of Queen Silvia."

Hmm. So Silvia was accepting, if ever she knew.

Nina Eldh said today according to Helsingin Sanomat, that refers to Aftonbladet, that the royal court is not going to have a trial against the book writers.

I've read many books about royalty. The more modern day royals look like boy scouts or the guy who sings in the church choir if you compare them to Monarchs of the past. There is nothing nowadays that is scandalous or shocking since everything is pretty much out in the open. The public has heard it all, I think. 100 years ago it might be shocking but not so much today.

Yes, indeed it might not be all too shocking news for us modern citizens. But one should never take certain vows to light-heartedly, especially not from a head of state that has made the following oath:"[...] We shall [...] throughout a legal, just and lenient Reign, seek to by Our utmost ability to advocate the veritable interests and welfare of the Realm and that of each of its inhabitants, [...] We thus confirm this by the written signature of Our name, and by a lively oath, that this We shall adhere to and carry out, so truly help Mine God to life and mind."

Besides this oath, HM The king of Sweden has also vowed, through his marriage vows, to be faithful to his wife. (Sexual faithfulness is not directly addressed in the marriage vow itself, but Christian tradition has accepted that if one is having an extramarital affair, one is guilty of breaking the marriage vow) According to the book The King of Sweden has repeatedly and systematically broken this vow.

If certain narratives mentioned in the book are true it becomes quite worrying that a head of state takes a vow so light-heartedly.

__________________I have had good experience and trial of this world. I know what it is to be a subject, what to be a sovereign, to have good neighbours, meet evil willers, found treason in trust and seen great benefits little regarded.
Elizabeth I

That being said, I am not sure I understand what the point of this book is...other than to embarass the King and Queen and possible wound the monarchy. If this is true, and by the King's statement/actions it might be, does the Queen need to relive this (if she didn't know before), do the children (although grown) need to be reminded of maybe a not so pleasant time of their childhood? Do we need to know this? And why?

Yes, the King is a public figure but is the purpose to show that he is human and not perfect? Or that he had a point in his marriage where all was not well but they survived it and their union is better now than before the hiccups, or that because of these hiccups the King is just like us, and therefore Sweden doesn't need the monarchy?

I don't get it.

That's what I'm thinking about. What's actually the point of this book? I don't get it either. Yeah, there were times in their marriage when not everything was working well and he cooped with it the way he did, but show me one marriage where everything is working perfectly all the time. It was a long time ago and it looks that they've already moved on. So what's the point of draging it out at this time? I don't think that one book about infidelity and visits to strip clubs can bring down a monarchy, they've survived far worser things.

I think ones private life should be kept private, unless he or she decides to share it. And it does not matter if he's king, president, pop star or ordinary citizen.

So That's not lie about this affairs and sex parties??? I'm shocked, I've never heard about any rumours and of course we couldn't believe in everything what media show us. I've lost my all respect for him. But, anyway, he seems to be a good king. To be honest, I'm glad that Victoria is going to be Queen. She and her husband are lovely couple, for some maybe boring, but good role model and doing their job well.

I wouldn't complain if all this old, severe looking but not so moral kings like Gustav or Juan Carlos go away but unfortunalety I have to wait for some time...

All the papers are screaming how the King admitted cheating his wife and wanted to "move on". What a simplistic interpretation... Let's think for a moment what he actually said. He said he's seen a few headlines and they were not pleasant. He then said he has not read the book, has discussed the book with his family and feels there's nothing to discuss and wants to move on. In any case the events happened a long time ago.

What if the headlines he happened to see are not the most rude ones? I doubt HM has the time to hang around newsstands reading the headlines and probably his staff is not very eager to present him with the worst ones. He might have only seen/heard that the headlines are about him not wanting necessarily to be a monarch (I'm sure he did have other career ambitions in the past, who wouldn't have had) and partying quite a bit when he was young. He might not know specifically what he's accused of (meaning adultery, sex parties etc.). So, what he meant to say was that he did have other dreams (before he grew into his role), party as a young man but those days are gone and there's no need to discuss them anymore. People who are dyslexic often think differently than others which also means that they're not always able to convey their thoughts to others in a way that they would be understood correctly.

I wish all this mud slinging would end soon. I find it particularly amusing that in the Swedish press when they are discussing the matter some people truly do feel that the royal family cannot and should not have any kind of private life. Some even turn this scandal into some sort of feminist issue... I've noticed reading people's comments that many Swedes are very harsh on their royals. I find it weird. If they only knew how much worse it would be if they had a president instead...